bath & wells: from the bishop

PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS DIOCESAN SYNOD JULY 2ND 2008

I was converted to Jesus Christ in my teens. My fourteen year old soul was saved from the sin and angst that mark such times in one’s life. The reality and presence of God , led me into much prayer, bible reading, spiritual nourishment through books, talks and fellowship, and a longing to be called to missionary service. Though deeply conscious of my ongoing predilection to sin, I nevertheless perceived a holiness, which occasionally spilled over into pride and arrogance. I remember the rebuke of my mother on one occasion of excess of piety remarking somewhat sardonically, ‘How much better I was than them.’

I earnestly sought membership of the best church I could find, where people of like mind and similar aspirations to holiness would gather. I joyfully left the conservative evangelical Anglican parish where I attended, because it did not practice believers baptism, and was only interested in my being confirmed. Soon the church I joined began to show its flaws and , weaknesses, and I was greatly exercised as to whether I could continue there. An Anglican friend of my Dad’s who I admired because he had been a Japanese POW and worked for the BBC, and was the man who studio managed the Goons, said to me: ‘Peter, if you find the perfect church don’t join it. You’ll only spoil it.’

These were wise words. And they remain so. The decision by the self appointed leadership of GAFCON to form the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans following their meeting in Jerusalem, is a bad, sad decision. It reflects the failure of people to recognise that whatever the grace of God does in converting people from sin, we remain sinful, and we think, act and behave sinfully throughout our lives. ‘There is no one righteous, no not one.’ Some sins are not greater than others. All sin that denies space for the love of God to be free to operate in whatever circumstances, is as grave as the most heinous of crimes committed against another.

The problem is not new. Throughout Christian history there have always been those who have perceived themselves as being more righteous and holy than others. The gospels present evidence of this. In the early mission of the church the influence of St. Peter and St. Paul, the Petrine and Pauline missions, dominated that which came from the Johannine tradition. St. John’s gospel was essentially written as a corrective for those who thought of themselves as ‘confessing’ Christians. John’s Jesus bids his hearers not to desert or perceive themselves as better than others, but rather to act lovingly and seek unity.

In St. John particular emphasis is placed on two aspects of grace: love and unity. Nearly two chapters of John are taken up with the exhortation to love, and so often is the plea made to ‘love one another as, or because, Christ has loved you’, that we almost get to the point of saying, ‘Don’t keep on about it. We get the message.’  But the reality is that we don’t – hence the insistence of the Jesus of John’s gospel.

Jesus’ prayer for unity equally takes up significant space in John’s gospel. It is clear both directly and indirectly, that the breaking of unity is both a sin against God and against one’s fellow believers, as well as for the rest of humanity. Whatever, our respective views on the presenting issue of human sexuality, and God’s acceptance or otherwise of people’s behaviour towards one another in sexual relationships; no guidance is given more clearly in the Scriptures that sin which wilfully divides from brother from brother, sister from sister, threatens the whole fabric of human relationships whatever form they take. Hence John’s deep and profound appeal to listen and to act on Jesus appeal for love of one another and the maintenance of unity, especially when there is no agreement.

In recent years, matters to do with human sexuality have been perceived as the ‘presenting’ issue in the divisions within Anglicanism. Presenting issues however, are rarely the actual issue, and this became clear with the statement from GAFCON this week in which through the rejection of Rowan Williams as Archbishop of Canterbury an end was sought to the so called colonial domination of the Anglican Communion. The effect has been to shift the power to self appointed leaders from the Global South, which includes developed and developing countries. Such a move has revealed not so much a ‘spiritual movement to preserve and promote the truth and power of the gospel of salvation’, but rather the danger of the accusation of opportunism and self important ambition.

All such movements need an enemy. It is the basis upon which they survive. Creating the language of enmity by the use of terms such as ‘liberal, revisionist, secular and pluralist’, and applying them indiscriminately to all who they perceive to be not as they are, such movements eventually turn personal and focus their vitriol on individuals. Despite some somewhat disingenuous denials, leaders of GAFCON have done exactly this in respect of the Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams. The hand has been played. The enemy identified.

But now comes the real danger for such movements. For sadly, they can only exist by dissent. It is rumoured that divisions already exist in GAFCON and the refusal to name the signatories to the statement may well offer evidence of such division, but rumour or not, movements such as that proposed always split into factions sooner or later.

The Archbishop of Canterbury has rightly raised questions about the authority and acceptability of bishops in GAFCON’s proposed primatial council. Equally, he has asked how discipline is to be maintained across overlapping and competing jurisdictions. And the Bishop of Durham has raised the question as to who will determine which Anglicans within GAFCON are ‘upholding orthodox faith and practice?’

Like it or not, the press headlines have got it right. What GAFCON proposes is a new church; a protestant sect, led by self appointed and self regulating ministers. This may not be what was intended, but it is the reality. Creating such division is both sad and sinful.

I have little doubt that many in GAFCON have rightful concerns about aspects of teaching within areas of Anglicanism. But as the Archbishop has indicated, ‘if the teachings are not working effectively, the challenge is to renew them rather than to improvise solutions that may seem to be effective for some in the short term but will continue to create more problems than they solve.’

I have no wish to silence voices such as of those in GAFCON. They should be heard, but as the Bishop of Durham as observed ‘it should be within the larger party where the rest of us are working day and night for the same gospel, the  biblical wisdom, the same Lord.’ And I plead with those tempted by the apparent opportunity of a more holy church, not to be beguiled.

So where does that leave us? The late Dr. Paul Tournier, a Christian Swiss Psychiatrist once observed, ‘ Whatever the accumulated ruins may be, there is a purpose of God to be found.’ Paradoxically, GAFCON’s Declarations have liberated the Lambeth Conference from much of the anxiety that surrounded it. Lambeth now has the potential for strengthening the bonds of fellowship, of committing ourselves to the world that God loves, and to focussing on the agenda of the kingdom, the reign of God’s justice, love and peace.

+Peter

Bath and Wells